Regency Midland Construction, Inc. v. Legendary Structures Inc.

California Court of Appeal Nov 26, 2019 No. B292602MPublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a subcontractor who abandons a project before completion is not entitled to the release of withheld retention funds, as the contract defines the subcontractor's work as the specific performance of the party named in the agreement.

Issues

Whether a subcontractor is entitled to withheld retention funds after abandoning the project before completion.
Whether the trial court abused its discretion in determining the prevailing party for the purpose of awarding attorney fees.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The contract defines “SUBCONTRACTOR” as “Legendary Structures, Inc.” Legendary’s attempt to expand this definition to include ANM violates the contractual language.”

“The purpose of the retention clause was, as Legendary put it in oral argument, to “ensure proper performance.””

“Regency established Legendary was liable to it and not vice versa. Regency won a dollar judgment against Legendary. Regency prevailed.”

Filed 11/26/19 (unmodified opinion attached) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

REGENCY MIDLAND B292602 CONSTRUCTION INC., Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. BC629322

v. ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITION FOR LEGENDARY STRUCTURES, REHEARING INC.,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT:

The opinion filed November 7, 2019, in the above entitled matter is modified in the following manner:

1. The following is deleted from the second to last paragraph on page eight: This is incorrect.

There is no change in judgment. Appellant’s petition for rehearing is denied.

BIGELOW, P.J. GRIMES, J. WILEY, J.

Filed 11/7/19 (unmodified opinion) CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

REGENCY MIDLAND B292602 CONSTRUCTION, INC., (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Plaintiff and Respondent, No. BC629322)

LEGENDARY STRUCTURES INC.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Howard Halm, Judge. Affirmed. The Soni Law Firm, M. Danton Richardson, Leo E. Lundberg, Michael A. Long for Defendant and Appellant. Law Office of Parham Hendifar, Parham Hendifar, Michael Diaz for Plaintiff and Respondent. __________________________

Regency Midland Construction, Inc. v. Legendary Structures Inc.

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

BIGELOW, P.J. GRIMES, J. WILEY, J.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

LEGENDARY STRUCTURES INC.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

WILEY, J.

BIGELOW, P. J.

GRIMES, J.

AI Brief